Council says 'yes' to Walvis beachfront projects

By: MAGGI BARNARD at WALVIS BAY

TWO of three controversial developments on prime stretches of beach on Namibia's central coastline were given the green light at the monthly Walvis Bay Council meeting.

On June 17, Council re-affirmed its decision to approve

applications by two developers for land at Farm 46, popularly known

as Guns and Farm 36, despite the Ministry of Environment and

Tourism not yet having approved the environmental impact assessment

(EIA).

The proposals caused huge debate after environmentalists raised

concerns over the development of the area.

 

At the same meeting, Council decided not to approve an

application by Riverview Investment for the development of a

seafront area bordering the Swakop River mouth on the south

side.

 

This development also caused an outcry from people attending

public meetings that formed part of the EIA.

 

The development was not approved because of the negative

findings of the EIA.

 

In its further motivation for not approving the application,

Council states in its agenda that the land in question is zoned for

"conservation", like Farm 36 and 46.

 

"It is anticipated that serious objections will be launched

should Council consider this application.

 

Therefore, the opinion is held that before any further vacant

land along the coastline is to be considered for development, a

Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment Study be undertaken by

Council in order to determine the areas along the coastline where

development can and should be allowed."

 

A total of 18 and seven objections were received from the public

for the Farm 46 and 36 projects respectively.

 

These include the Wildlife Society of Namibia, the Namibia

Surfing Association and the International Surfing Association, the

Coastal Environmental Trust of Namibia, the Tour and Safari

Association of Namibia, the Atlantic Guano Syndicate, Dr Rob

Simmons of the National Biodiversity Programme and several

individuals.

 

Some of the issues raised covered the loss of prime, unspoilt

beachfront areas, negative impacts on the area that is a designated

Important Bird Area, the need for a strategic EIA, water shortages

and the ultimate disappearance of the sea view from the road.

 

In its motivation for approving the two developments, Council

maintained that the economic benefits and financial gain for the

town outweighed any possible negative aspects.

 

"The majority of concerns raised, if not all of them, which form

the essence of the objections, would in practice be dealt with

successfully by implementing mitigatory measures."

 

The recommendation stated that the mitigatory measures be

included as additional conditions in Council's standard agreement

of sale with the two developers.

 

According to a synopsis of the EIA in the agenda, indications

are that the negative impacts are not as significant as some of the

positive socio-economic benefits that would be derived from the

project.

 

As no income is derived from the site at the moment, the

Municipality is expected to receive a significant increase in

revenue from rental, provision of services, rates, levies and

licences.

 

In answer to a question raised at the public meeting on how many

jobs the two developments would create, the agenda listed these as

360 permanent jobs for the Farm 46 development, while the Farm 36

development would create approximately 6 800 direct and 20 000

indirect jobs over the eight-year construction period.

 

The two developments will, according to the Council, boost the

local economy by N$385 million and N$750 million respectively.

 

A further point raised in the agenda on the much-debated endemic

Damara Tern that breeds on the central coastline, is that,

according to Seal Consulting Engineers, no Damara Tern nests were

found at the project site.

 

While Council recommended sending a letter to the Minister of

Regional, Local Government and Housing to approve the resolution,

the EIA documents have not been made public yet, nor has the

Ministry of Environment and Tourism issued a clearance certificate

for the study.

 

The consultants conducting the EIA said at the public meeting

that the final report would be submitted to the relevant

authorities, with the Ministry of Environment and Tourism having

the last say on whether to approve the developments or not.

 

The proposals caused huge debate after environmentalists raised

concerns over the development of the area.At the same meeting,

Council decided not to approve an application by Riverview

Investment for the development of a seafront area bordering the

Swakop River mouth on the south side.This development also caused

an outcry from people attending public meetings that formed part of

the EIA.The development was not approved because of the negative

findings of the EIA.In its further motivation for not approving the

application, Council states in its agenda that the land in question

is zoned for "conservation", like Farm 36 and 46."It is anticipated

that serious objections will be launched should Council consider

this application.Therefore, the opinion is held that before any

further vacant land along the coastline is to be considered for

development, a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment Study be

undertaken by Council in order to determine the areas along the

coastline where development can and should be allowed."A total of

18 and seven objections were received from the public for the Farm

46 and 36 projects respectively.These include the Wildlife Society

of Namibia, the Namibia Surfing Association and the International

Surfing Association, the Coastal Environmental Trust of Namibia,

the Tour and Safari Association of Namibia, the Atlantic Guano

Syndicate, Dr Rob Simmons of the National Biodiversity Programme

and several individuals.Some of the issues raised covered the loss

of prime, unspoilt beachfront areas, negative impacts on the area

that is a designated Important Bird Area, the need for a strategic

EIA, water shortages and the ultimate disappearance of the sea view

from the road.In its motivation for approving the two developments,

Council maintained that the economic benefits and financial gain

for the town outweighed any possible negative aspects."The majority

of concerns raised, if not all of them, which form the essence of

the objections, would in practice be dealt with successfully by

implementing mitigatory measures."The recommendation stated that

the mitigatory measures be included as additional conditions in

Council's standard agreement of sale with the two

developers.According to a synopsis of the EIA in the agenda,

indications are that the negative impacts are not as significant as

some of the positive socio-economic benefits that would be derived

from the project.As no income is derived from the site at the

moment, the Municipality is expected to receive a significant

increase in revenue from rental, provision of services, rates,

levies and licences.In answer to a question raised at the public

meeting on how many jobs the two developments would create, the

agenda listed these as 360 permanent jobs for the Farm 46

development, while the Farm 36 development would create

approximately 6 800 direct and 20 000 indirect jobs over the

eight-year construction period.The two developments will, according

to the Council, boost the local economy by N$385 million and N$750

million respectively.A further point raised in the agenda on the

much-debated endemic Damara Tern that breeds on the central

coastline, is that, according to Seal Consulting Engineers, no

Damara Tern nests were found at the project site.While Council

recommended sending a letter to the Minister of Regional, Local

Government and Housing to approve the resolution, the EIA documents

have not been made public yet, nor has the Ministry of Environment

and Tourism issued a clearance certificate for the study.The

consultants conducting the EIA said at the public meeting that the

final report would be submitted to the relevant authorities, with

the Ministry of Environment and Tourism having the last say on

whether to approve the developments or not.

---